 |
| |
|
|
TechWins
|
 |
Arizona
Apr 2001
time: 22:17
|
|
Excuse me as I am confident this idea has probably already been mentioned in the list, but I wanted to garnish discussion on the idea.
There are already military leaders and scientific icons, among religious profits to be introduced in Civ4, so why not including cultural icons too?
A cultural icon would help add a much needed bonus to being a peaceful, culturally intensive nation. The appearance of a cultural icon could be smiliar to that of a scientific icon; if a city reaches, say, 1000 cultural points and/or an above level (10,000?) it has a 1-2% chance of spawning a cultural leader. If Athens reached 1000 cultural points Plato or Aristotle might be spawned or if Berlin reached 10,000 cultural points Beethoven might be spawned. It is rather self explanitory from that perspective.
The bonus of a cultural icon would be almost exactly the same again as a scientific icon. A scientific icon could rush any building, just as a cultural icon can. The cultural icon would instead, obviously, of being able to help rush a technology the cultural icon could possibly rush any city to 1000 cultural points administering the idea that the person/icon flourished culture within a Civ.
It was a nice step forward in Conquests for scientific leaders to be recognized but in Civ4 one more step needs to be taken into recognizing cultural leaders.
For listing purposes we could list some of the cultural leaders each Civ could have. Basically this is where history buffs can show-off by naming key figures in culture for the Persians, Aztecs, Celts, or any generally obscure knowledge of a Civ. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Well, I probably can't come up with any truly obscure ones, and the first ones I can think of may be too recent to put in the game. I guess anything before 1800 wouldn't be too recent though. And it'll be fun to add my own in the editor for my own purposes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Don't you dare call Jesus a Roman!! Maybe Josephus...
Oh, and all sorts of Great Leaders should add numbers after the names when they repeat. Maybe even have only one name per category per civ, and just add numbers?
England: Shakespeare.
Egypt: Joseph?
Hebrews: Abraham, Moses, Isaiah
France: Joan
Germany: Martin Luther
Russia: Tolstoy
USA: Ann Lee, William Penn, Jules Verne
Spain: Cervantes, Columbus
Scandinavia: Hans Christian Andersen
Arabs: Mohammed
Cherokee: Sequoyah
Could be interesting if there's much splitting of civs, so new civs could have a new available great leader of each type.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Would it even be possible to include Cultural Icons for more than a few civs? Sounds like something that should be turnoffable for people who have obscure tastes of which civs they want to add.
Funny how the Scandinavians want to be Vikings in the game while the rest of us think we're trying to be more correct.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Where I come from I'm always told that the Vikings were neither a civilization nor an ethnic group, but a profession of pirates who went on raids. Maybe the game should call them the Norse? I am very confused about what constitutes Scandinavia. I consider the five countries to be Scandinavia, or alternately the three countries. I'm guessing you'll tell me the correct definition is the two countries of the one peninsula? I sort of base my definition on which languages are called Scandinavian, and alternately which are basically dialects of one language. I guess nether explains Finland, however. Of course, I'd like to be able to include the Baltics and maybe Karelia, but I don't. Then there's people who seem to think Benelux is Scandinavia. One Norwegian I've met seemed totally confused with my use of the term Scandinavia.
Ah well, I'll let you live in the real world while I live in my own which I seem to share with the rest of us stupid Americans.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nikolai
|
 |
Bergen, Norway
Oct 2000
time: 06:17
|
|
From Webster's Online Dictionary.
quote:
Scandinavia is the region of the Scandinavian Peninsula.
The usage and meaning of the term Scandinavia is somewhat ambiguous:
* In Scandinavia, Norway, Sweden and (mostly) Denmark are considered parts of Scandinavia.
* Outside of Scandinavia, also Finland (and often Iceland) are counted to Scandinavia.
* In a German mindset, Denmark and Iceland are often excluded.
* The term the Nordic countries is used by the Scandinavians unambigously for Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland.
|
There were Norwegian, Swedish and Danish Vikings. The Swedish mostly cared for Russia, while the Danish and the Norwegian took on Western Europe. That's the short story. For me, calling a civ Scandinavian is utter rubbish and it sounds silly, not to say idiotic. While the Vikings never was one country or anything, they suits much better than some geographical name like Scandinavian. And frankly, the Vikings was much more of a civ.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Of course, the ideal solution would be to have Norway, Sweden, and Denmark separate civs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Brent
|
|
Scandinavian, Norse, or Nordic are more inclusive than Viking. You wouldn't want to exclude the modern Scandinavians, would you? Again, it would be easiest to agree to have separate Norwegians, Swedes, and Danes. Maybe choose one specific nation of the three for the initial release? Sweden is largest, Denmark seems to be more integrated into the rest of Europe, and Norway is the archetype. Could they get away with squeezing elements of the remaining two under the name of the one they choose, like calling HCA a Norwegian?
The makers of the game should only choose civs they can find the needed data for, unless they want to invent things (wasn't Ragnar invented?), but think of the poor players! We might really want to play a particular Civ, but are we out of luck if we can't find the standard data? If we want to be Hopewell, do we have to mod the game into a Risk hybrid?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Sinister
|
|
Sure about the India part?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nikolai
|
|
Bergen, Norway
Oct 2000
time: 06:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
Scandinavian, Norse, or Nordic are more inclusive than Viking. You wouldn't want to exclude the modern Scandinavians, would you? Again, it would be easiest to agree to have separate Norwegians, Swedes, and Danes. Maybe choose one specific nation of the three for the initial release? Sweden is largest, Denmark seems to be more integrated into the rest of Europe, and Norway is the archetype. Could they get away with squeezing elements of the remaining two under the name of the one they choose, like calling HCA a Norwegian?
The makers of the game should only choose civs they can find the needed data for, unless they want to invent things (wasn't Ragnar invented?), but think of the poor players! We might really want to play a particular Civ, but are we out of luck if we can't find the standard data? If we want to be Hopewell, do we have to mod the game into a Risk hybrid? |
I disagree, if we should have one civ, it should be the Vikings. If more is allowed, then Sweden/Norway/Denark etc. is okay. But we know there will be only 19 civs remember.
BTW, Ragnar is a hero from the sagas.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Max Sinister
Sure about the India part? |
The trading networks stretched as far as India- I didn't say the Vikings travelled there. They were fully integrated into Byzantine Greek and Arab trading systems- exchanging slaves, resins, furs, amber, tallow, beeswax and such for gold and spices, and silks.
They did however reach Central Asia, Byzantium, North Africa, Italy, Spain and of course North America.
I think it was in a Swedish Viking grave site that they found a bronze Buddha- showing how avid the Vikings were for the novel, the unknown and the precious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zingraff
|
|
quote:
Well find whoever told you that and give them a good beating. |
Er, no.
This is like reffering to all the Japanese as Samurais.
The term Viking is that of a spesific Norse professional, who went abroad (went Viking) in the summer to make raids, do trade and explore nearby and distant waters, often undertaking all of the above tasks on each cruise.
Norse is really the most appropriate label, being more inclusive and historically correct than Viking, and less confusing and mislead than Scandinavian and Nordic. After all, a Viking was a Norseman but the Norseman wasn't neccessarily a Viking. The culture and language as a whole was Norse, and as the Viking was neccessarily a pagan, the thourough adoption of Christianity after year 1000 AD, meant the Viking way of life gradually vanished.
As for the for the language Norse, this evolved into the modern Scandinavian languages, but we're still around, and Denmark, as far as I know, is one of the oldest monarchies in the world, originating in the 8th century or so.
Having the Vikings/Norse as one, sole civilization, makes perfect sense. After all, Norway, Denmark and Sweden shares much history, and culturally and socially the countries are very much the same. Besides, in the 14th century, under the Kalmar Union, the countries were briefly united under one crown, and as a result Denmark-Norway remained a double monarchy for four hundred years.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Max Sinister
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
The trading networks stretched as far as India- I didn't say the Vikings travelled there. |
Sorry, then I misunderstood you.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-04-2005 13:41
You got to be kidding me...
|